Field Test Evaluation of Conservation Retrofits of Low-Income, Single-Family Buildings in Wisconsin: Audit Field Test Implementation and Results Page: 60 of 84
This report is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided to Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
example, houses with wall insulation are not candidates for receiving wall insu-
lation. Similarly, houses with newer furnaces (say less than 10 years old) or
with small space heating bills are unlikely to be cost-effective candidates for
furnace replacement. This type of screening could be done over the telephone in
Table 5.4 shows the effects of implementing these approaches to improve
program cost effectiveness. Each approach leads to appreciable improvements in
program cost effectiveness. The first, not performing retrofits in houses where
no major retrofits are needed, may be the easiest to implement. Adding new
cost-effective major retrofits is an attractive option. Besides improving
program cost effectiveness, it leads to more energy savings and allows savings
to be provided to more households. Reducing audit and administrative costs is
certainly effective, but it is not clear how practical it is. There are cer-
tainly practical limits to how far administrative costs can be reduced.
Table 5.4. Comparison of approaches for improving program cost effectiveness.
Base case (all houses, Table 5.3). 12.6
Do no retrofits on houses that cannot benefit 13.3
from major retrofits.
Replace minor retrofits in "no major retrofit" homes 13.6
with hypothetical new and cost-effective
(15 therms/year/$100) retrofits.
Reduce audit and administrative costs from $300 13.4
Here’s what’s next.
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
McCold, L.N. Field Test Evaluation of Conservation Retrofits of Low-Income, Single-Family Buildings in Wisconsin: Audit Field Test Implementation and Results, report, January 1, 1988; United States. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc740901/m1/60/: accessed December 16, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.